DOCSLIB.ORG

Monopolies During the Reign of James I. William Charles Thompson

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Monopolies During the Reign of James I. William Charles Thompson University of Richmond UR Scholarship Repository Master's Theses Student Research 1968 Monopolies during the reign of James I. William Charles Thompson Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.richmond.edu/masters-theses Part of the European History Commons Recommended Citation Thompson, William Charles, "Monopolies during the reign of James I." (1968). Master's Theses. 1368. https://scholarship.richmond.edu/masters-theses/1368 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Research at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MONOPOLIES DURING THE REIGH OF JAMES l BY WILLIAM CHARLES TH0HPSOI1 A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF RICllHOND Ill CANDIDACY FOR TUE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS Ili HISTORY Jmm, 1968 COHTEHTS I Monopolies in Theory and Practice. II The &lrJ.y Oppositi9n, 1606-1614 III The Parliament or 1621 and the Statuo of Monopolies. 1 Bibliogre.ph7 Autobiography WNOPOLIES IN THEORY AND PRACTICE When Elizabeth I ascended the throne in 1 S58, she -was confront­ ed vith a changing economic situation. English industry, which bad for centuries been localized in the towns under guild control, was maturing and becoming national in scope •1 In accordance vi th the prevailing economic precepts of the age, Elizabeth desired to bring industry under a system or national regulation. Such a system or regulation we, however, even for the strongest and most ingen- ious of the Tudor autocrats, e. difficult and elusive goal. Plagued throughout her long reign by a shortage of funds, Elizabeth simply couJ.d not afford to involve the state in public enterprise on its own account.2 Another method of gaining a grip on industry had to be devised., For a sovereign vho possessed ample pover but inadequate financial resources, the most logical course of action was the es­ tablishment of a system or patents. By granting patents of mo110po:cy, the Queen.cou.1.d assure those Yith the capital to start·a nev industry excluslve privileges on a national scale, thus allo'Wing her aimultan• iw1111am H. Price, The English £a.tents of MonopoJ.y (Boston: Hough­ tn, Mifnin and Co., 1906), P• • Ibid, p.7. 2 eously to stimulate :industrial development and retain control over it. After a slow start Eliza.beth made grants vith such steadily increasing vigor that by the closing years of the reign her system or patents ho.d become vory widespread indeed. More important, ma.iv 0£ Elizabeth's patent grants constituted a serious annoyance to the public at large. While many patents of' monopo4' were rea.aible or even commendable in theory, vory few proved to be so in practice. The incentive which originally prompted Eliza.beth to grant mo­ nopoly pa.tents was a genuine desire to stimulate industry and en­ courage invention, but as tho years passed such legitimate consid­ erations began to fade, and othera less commendable appeared. The ., .. principal motivation behind the grantin� (?f patents soon became mercena.ry.3 Few grants vere made, much less sought, -which did not promise monetary aggrandizement either to the Crow or to the patentee. Elizaboth took advantage of monopoly grants to both collect and pay off debts, to reward favorites and servants, and to supplement her royal 1neomes.4 Debtors, creditors, and favorites vho became patentees were scavengers. Their grants amounted to licenseo to bleed the English peop;t.e vith tho blessing of' the Q\leen, who was more than happy to share the profits. Bllt share in tho prof'ito was one thing Elizabeth and later James never real.4r managed to accomplish •. As far as providing a means by vhich to enrich the royal exchequer, the patent eyatem was a dismal failure. 3Ibid, p.14. 4:tbig. p.15. 3 On several different occasions Elizabeth•s parliaments complain• ed of the indignities.and abuses hichw the English people -were suf .. faring at the hands of the patentees and their agents. Because of the iron-gripped control the Queen exercisod over hor parliaments tha proteots of the House of Commons went unheeded for many years. Members who dared even to speak or monopoly abuses were reprimanded.5 Meanwhile, the situation deteriorated to the point where the systea o£ patents might be justly described as an ugly monster, rotten with corruption and abuse.. Finally, in 1601, the monopolies aroused a storm or indignation so great that even Elizabeth had to yield • . She was forced to concede that some of the patents had been abused, and thereupon voided the more obnoxious ones and gave to the courts of law the right to determine the validity of those remaining in force.6 At this point it became clear that Elizabath had stretched her prerogative of interference in thEl matter or trade to the breaking point. Great oppressions bad been practiced in her mme and by, authority of her patents. Under tna.nagement leas adept than hers the widespread indignation aroused by patent abuses might have led to a political uphea.�1.7 Elizabeth was able to stave orr a challenge to her authority by adroit political maneuvering, but her victory was only e. superficial one. The seeds or discontent over the monopolies 5Ibid, p.20 6Ibid,. p.22 '1-John w. Gordon, Monopolies by Pa tents, and the Sta.tuab],e Ramgdies Available to the Public (London: Stevens and Sons, Ltd., 1897), p.1. 4 were deeply sow,8 and it was lert to Elizabeth•s inexperienced Scottish successor., James Stuart, to reap their bitter fruit. On /'flp.,y7, 1603, only four days after his arrival in London to assume the throne, James I recalled all patento of monopoly. The proclamation contained a preamble praising the loyalty and devotion or the English people. The body or the deoreo stated that, in con- sidera.tion of this loyalty, Jatnes desired to show hov willing he was and always vould bo to requite the people's love. Realizing tha.t monopolies had constituted a serious grievance to the public during the la.at yoars of ·ttour sister" Elizabeth's reign, Ja:mes demon­ strated his gratitude by suspendina all [,1Tants and charters of moboply and all "licenses to dispgnse •.dth penal laws, except grants to corporations and companies of arts or 1:misteries• and for enlarging trade until examination can be had of them by tho king with the ad• vice of his Couuoil".9 Because digging for saltpotor ws deemed necessary to the national welfare, patents for this right were'not suspended, although saltpetemen were advised to take special ca.re in the pursuit or their tasks. In view of the abuses ordinarily attendant upon this industry, the exercise of a little care would have been a great improvement indeed. Subjects desiring to petition the king vere advised to do so privately and in an orderly manner.10 It thus appeared that James vould be content, a.t least for a �J;bid, p.2. Pric�, EnglJ.sh Pa.touts, p.163. 10�. 5 while, not to overst.ep 1.fba"t aeemed to be the outer limits of the ... prerogative in regard'to !rade.11 Undoubtedly this proclamation · was the work of Robert�.Cecil, the Earl of Salisbury, and other of the King's advisera,,,.'"'Who seized upon the change of' dynasty to re­ move nagrallt grl.§V'p,ncea. 12 It was a Yise and greatly needed �tep, I but those \ilhtl.' re�d • it• as a true revelation of James•s intentions were to be,pai.tifiUJ.y disillusioned later on. James ws still putting ' . on fair sho.w;t in March, 1604; when he opened his first parliament. In his S..P�,ch he apologized for the lack of favors and grants, pre­ sw:nably l,Il. the form of patents, to friends and others who might _ .rveexptfoted. them. To further ameliorate the monopoly situation, ,lames established permanent investigative machinery which included a body called the Commission for SUits.13 This commission vould eval­ uate all petitions for patents, and none vould be granted without its approval;. The great potential for good of this group was never prop­ er!¥ exploited, so it provided little check on the evils of monopol.y'. Among tf�e referees,. as members or the Commission wore called, Sir ·-Fl-anci.S "Bacon was the most prominent. His role in the subsequent histo.ry of the monopolies was an important one. Yet, despite his ''.'.' gooa�:start, James proved unable to controi his grants. By 1606 the Hot!se or Commons had begun to complain loudly about abuses perpe­ tratea by authority or his pa.t:ents. e 6 A monopoly ney be defined.as n form ::>f state control encompas• i.ng "the delegation oi' authority to an individual or group of indi• viduals acting ln a corporate capacityn.14 Patents of :monopoly- as issued by Ja.meo I may be differontinted into four categories, not all of vhich are to be condemned. According to Sir Prancis Bacon, the first type of monopoly by patent wns logitil'l8.tely granted when "any m.n out of his o-wn lrlt, i..'ldustry or endeavour finds out a-ny­ thing beneficial for the commonwalth*••1 5 The famcus 1603 Case of :Monopolies, lnrcy vs. 1Ulen, established this as the only juntifiable basis for a p."l.tent grant, and patent law3 ever since have been ground­ ed on this principle. The court in this case nlso held thn.t monopo-­ ·uzation or s;ny trade not newly invented or importod ,ma illegal and detrimental to mgland.16 Patents ware granted not only for first invention of a machine or pl"ocesn, but also for fil•st importa.­ tion.17 The second type of patent to be considered is the license, of vhich there were two types.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Stapylton Final Version
    1 THE PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE OF FREEDOM FROM ARREST, 1603–1629 Keith A. T. Stapylton UCL Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2016 Page 2 DECLARATION I, Keith Anthony Thomas Stapylton, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. Signed Page 3 ABSTRACT This thesis considers the English parliamentary privilege of freedom from arrest (and other legal processes), 1603-1629. Although it is under-represented in the historiography, the early Stuart Commons cherished this particular privilege as much as they valued freedom of speech. Previously one of the privileges requested from the monarch at the start of a parliament, by the seventeenth century freedom from arrest was increasingly claimed as an ‘ancient’, ‘undoubted’ right that secured the attendance of members, and safeguarded their honour, dignity, property, and ‘necessary’ servants. Uncertainty over the status and operation of the privilege was a major contemporary issue, and this prompted key questions for research. First, did ill definition of the constitutional relationship between the crown and its prerogatives, and parliament and its privileges, lead to tensions, increasingly polemical attitudes, and a questioning of the royal prerogative? Where did sovereignty now lie? Second, was it important to maximise the scope of the privilege, if parliament was to carry out its business properly? Did ad hoc management of individual privilege cases nevertheless have the cumulative effect of enhancing the authority and confidence of the Commons? Third, to what extent was the exploitation or abuse of privilege an unintended consequence of the strengthening of the Commons’ authority in matters of privilege? Such matters are not treated discretely, but are embedded within chapters that follow a thematic, broadly chronological approach.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lives of the Chief Justices of England
    This is a reproduction of a library book that was digitized by Google as part of an ongoing effort to preserve the information in books and make it universally accessible. https://books.google.com Cui.U.K. &3o 1 THE LIVES OK THE CHIEF JUSTICES ENGLAND. FROM THE NORMAN CONQUEST TILL THE DEATH OF LORD TENTERDEN. By JOHN LOKD CAMPBELL, LL.D. F.E.S.E.: AUTHOR OF 'THE LIVES OF THE LOKD CHANCELLORS OF ENGLANd.' THIRD EDITION. IN FOUR VOLUMES.— Vol. II. LONDON: JOHN MUEKAY, ALBEMAELE STEEET. 1874. The right of Translation is reserved. Uniform with the present Work. LIVES OF THE LOED CHANCELLOBS, AND Keepers op the Great Skal op England, from the Earliest Times till the Reign of George the Fourth. By John Lord Campbell, LL.D. Fourth Edition. 10 vols. Crown 8vo. 6s. ' each. " A work of sterling merit — one of very great labour, of richly diversified interest, and, we arc satisfied, of lasting value and estimation. We doubt If there be half-a-dozen living men who could produce a Biographical Series on such a scale, at all likely to command so much applause from the candid among the iearned as well as from the curious of the laity." — Quarterly Review. &ONdON: PRINTEd BT WILLIAM CLOWES ANd SONS, STAMFORd STREET ANd CHARING CROSS. CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME. CHAPTER XI.— continued. LIVES OF THE CHIEF JUSTICES FROM THE DISMISSAL OF SIR EDWARD COKE TILL THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMONWEALTH. Sir Nicholas Hyde, Page 1. His Reputation as a Lawyer, 1. His Con duct as Chief Justice of the King's Bench, 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Topic Key Foci Suggested Tasks/ Homework Information the Political
    Topic Key Foci Suggested Tasks/ Homework Information The Political Nation and the social What was the Political Nation? Mind map THE POLITICAL NATION: The Pages 1-8 basis of power Social basis of power Monarch, Basis of Power, Political Importance of land ownership and rival forms of Nation Revision Guide Page 6 wealth James I and Charles I: character, Characters of James and Charles Produce a table showing the Pages 9-16 court and favourites Shape and style of monarchies- each monarchs views differences in James and Charles’ view Favourites especially Buckingham on monarchy Revision Guide Pages 7-9 19. Crown and Political Nation, 1604-1640 The finances of the Crown and Financial weaknesses of the Crown- causes Construct a timeline from 1603-1629 Pages 17-26 attempts at reform Attempts to reform and strengthen royal finances that shows all attempts by both kings during James’ reign to reform and improve crown finances- Revision Guide Pages 10-13 Great Contract colour code successes in green and Attempts to reform and strengthen royal finances failures in red during Charles reign Forced Loan Religion and religious divisions Challenges to James’ church from Catholics Mind map JAMES I AND RELIGION: Pages 27-36 Challenges to James’ church from Puritans Puritans, Scottish Kirk, Catholics Hampton Court Conference Revision Guide Pages 14-17 Bancroft’s Canons Mind map RELIGIOUS ISSUES UNDER Development of Arminianism CHARLES: Charles’ religious views, 18. Street Wars of Religion: Puritans and Charles’ favouring of Arminianism
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief Chronology of the House of Commons House of Commons Information Office Factsheet G3
    Factsheet G3 House of Commons Information Office General Series A Brief Chronology of the August 2010 House of Commons Contents Origins of Parliament at Westminster: Before 1400 2 15th and 16th centuries 3 Treason, revolution and the Bill of Rights: This factsheet has been archived so the content The 17th Century 4 The Act of Settlement to the Great Reform and web links may be out of date. Please visit Bill: 1700-1832 7 our About Parliament pages for current Developments to 1945 9 information. The post-war years: 11 The House of Commons in the 21st Century 13 Contact information 16 Feedback form 17 The following is a selective list of some of the important dates in the history of the development of the House of Commons. Entries marked with a “B” refer to the building only. This Factsheet is also available on the Internet from: http://www.parliament.uk/factsheets August 2010 FS No.G3 Ed 3.3 ISSN 0144-4689 © Parliamentary Copyright (House of Commons) 2010 May be reproduced for purposes of private study or research without permission. Reproduction for sale or other commercial purposes not permitted. 2 A Brief Chronology of the House of Commons House of Commons Information Office Factsheet G3 Origins of Parliament at Westminster: Before 1400 1097-99 B Westminster Hall built (William Rufus). 1215 Magna Carta sealed by King John at Runnymede. 1254 Sheriffs of counties instructed to send Knights of the Shire to advise the King on finance. 1265 Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester, summoned a Parliament in the King’s name to meet at Westminster (20 January to 20 March); it is composed of Bishops, Abbots, Peers, Knights of the Shire and Town Burgesses.
    [Show full text]
  • Inquiry Into Patent Amendment (Human Genes and Biological Materials) Bill 2010
    Submission to the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs Inquiry into Patent Amendment (Human Genes and Biological Materials) Bill 2010 Chris Dent, Intellectual Property Research Institute of Australia February 2011 Contact Details The contact for this submission is: Dr Chris Dent, Senior Research Fellow, IPRIA Phone: (03) 8344 1134 Fax: (03) 8344 2111 Email: [email protected] WEBSITE : www.ipria.org 1. Introduction The Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs has asked for submissions for its Inquiry into the Patent Amendment (Human Genes and Biological Materials) Bill 2010 (the Bill). I offer a summary of the results of some of my research at IPRIA in the hope that the Committee will find them useful. 1 I should note at the outset, the focus of my work in this area has been historical; as such, this submission is aimed only at the proposed amendment to s. 18(1)(a) of the Patents Act 1990 (and by implication the amendment to s. 18(1A)(a)). In short, I do not think that the apparently expanded role of s. 6 of the Statute of Monopolies 1624 (the Statute) will add clarity to patent practice today – on the basis that there is no evidence that there was a clear distinction between invention and discovery in the early 17 th century. An exploration of the political, economic and “technological” context of the Statute, and the evidence we have of its use, will demonstrate the drafters of the Statute did not mean the same thing as the drafters of the Bill seem to think they meant.
    [Show full text]
  • Cromwellian Anger Was the Passage in 1650 of Repressive Friends'
    Cromwelliana The Journal of 2003 'l'ho Crom\\'.Oll Alloooluthm CROMWELLIANA 2003 l'rcoklcnt: Dl' llAlUW CO\l(IA1© l"hD, t'Rl-llmS 1 Editor Jane A. Mills Vice l'l'csidcnts: Right HM Mlchncl l1'oe>t1 l'C Profcssot·JONN MOlUUU.., Dl,llll, F.13A, FlU-IistS Consultant Peter Gaunt Professor lVAN ROOTS, MA, l~S.A, FlU~listS Professor AUSTIN WOOLll'YCH. MA, Dlitt, FBA CONTENTS Professor BLAIR WORDEN, FBA PAT BARNES AGM Lecture 2003. TREWIN COPPLESTON, FRGS By Dr Barry Coward 2 Right Hon FRANK DOBSON, MF Chairman: Dr PETER GAUNT, PhD, FRHistS 350 Years On: Cromwell and the Long Parliament. Honorary Secretary: MICHAEL BYRD By Professor Blair Worden 16 5 Town Farm Close, Pinchbeck, near Spalding, Lincolnshire, PEl 1 3SG Learning the Ropes in 'His Own Fields': Cromwell's Early Sieges in the East Honorary Treasurer: DAVID SMITH Midlands. 3 Bowgrave Copse, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 2NL By Dr Peter Gaunt 27 THE CROMWELL ASSOCIATION was founded in 1935 by the late Rt Hon Writings and Sources VI. Durham University: 'A Pious and laudable work'. By Jane A Mills · Isaac Foot and others to commemorate Oliver Cromwell, the great Puritan 40 statesman, and to encourage the study of the history of his times, his achievements and influence. It is neither political nor sectarian, its aims being The Revolutionary Navy, 1648-1654. essentially historical. The Association seeks to advance its aims in a variety of By Professor Bernard Capp 47 ways, which have included: 'Ancient and Familiar Neighbours': England and Holland on the eve of the a.
    [Show full text]
  • Libeling Painting: Exploring the Gap Between Text and Image in the Critical Discourse on George Villiers, the First Duke of Buckingham
    Libeling Painting: Exploring the Gap between Text and Image in the Critical Discourse on George Villiers, the First Duke of Buckingham THESIS Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Ivana May Rosenblatt Graduate Program in History of Art The Ohio State University 2009 Master's Examination Committee: Barbara Haeger, Advisor Christian Kleinbub Copyright by Ivana May Rosenblatt 2009 Abstract This paper investigates the imagery of George Villiers, the first Duke of Buckingham, by reinserting it into the visual and material culture of the Stuart court and by considering the role that medium and style played in its interpretation. Recent scholarship on Buckingham‘s imagery has highlighted the oppositional figures in both Rubens‘ and Honthorst‘s allegorical paintings of the Duke, and, picking up on the existence of ―Felton Commended,‖ a libel which references these allegories in relation to illusion, argued dually that Buckingham‘s imagery is generally defensive, a result of his unstable position as royal favorite, and that these paintings consciously presented images of the Duke which explicitly and topically responded to verse libels criticizing him. However, in so doing, this scholarship ignores the gap between written libels and pictorial images and creates a direct dialogue between two media that did not speak directly to each other. In this thesis I strive to rectify these errors by examining a range of pictorial images of Buckingham, considering the different audiences of painting and verse libel and addressing the seventeenth-century understanding of the medium of painting, which defended painterly illusionism and positioned painting as a ritualized language.
    [Show full text]
  • Law Reform in Early Modern England 1500–1740
    Law Reform in Early Modern England 1500–1740 Crown, Parliament and the Press Barbara J Shapiro HART PUBLISHING Bloomsbury Publishing Plc Kemp House , Chawley Park, Cumnor Hill, Oxford , OX2 9PH , UK 1385 Broadway, New York, NY 10018, USA HART PUBLISHING, the Hart/Stag logo, BLOOMSBURY and the Diana logo are trademarks of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc First published in Great Britain 2019 Copyright © Barbara J Shapiro, 2019 Barbara J Shapiro has asserted her right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 to be identifi ed as Author of this work. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers. While every care has been taken to ensure the accuracy of this work, no responsibility for loss or damage occasioned to any person acting or refraining from action as a result of any statement in it can be accepted by the authors, editors or publishers. All UK Government legislation and other public sector information used in the work is Crown Copyright © . All House of Lords and House of Commons information used in the work is Parliamentary Copyright © . This information is reused under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 ( http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/ open-government-licence/version/3 ) except where otherwise stated. All Eur-lex material used in the work is © European Union, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/ , 1998–2019. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
    [Show full text]
  • The Spanish Match and Jacobean Political Thought, 1618-1624
    Opposition in a pre-Republican Age? The Spanish Match and Jacobean Political Thought, 1618-1624 Kimberley Jayne Hackett Ph.D University of York History Department July 2009 Abstract Seventeenth-century English political thought was once viewed as insular and bound by a common law mentality. Significant work has been done to revise this picture and highlight the role played by continental religious resistance theory and what has been termed 'classical republicanism'. In addition to identifying these wider influences, recent work has focused upon the development of a public sphere that reveals a more socially diverse engagement with politics, authority and opposition than has hitherto been acknowledged. Yet for the period before the Civil War our understanding of the way that several intellectual influences were interacting to inform a politically alert 'public' is unclear, and expressions of political opposition are often tied to a pre-determined category of religious affiliation. As religious tension erupted into conflict on the continent, James I's pursuit ofa Spanish bride for Prince Charles and determination to follow a diplomatic solution to the war put his policy direction at odds with a dominant swathe of public opinion. During the last years of his reign, therefore, James experienced an unprecedented amount of opposition to his government of England. This opposition was articulated through a variety of media, and began to raise questions beyond the conduct of policy in addressing fundamental issues of political authority. By examining the deployment of political ideas during the domestic crisis of the early 1620s, this thesis seeks to uncover the varied ways in which differing discourses upon authority and obedience were being articulated against royal government.
    [Show full text]
  • Lions in Conflict: Ellesmere, Bacon and Coke
    LIONS IN CONFLICT: ELLESMERE, BACON AND COKE - THE PREROGATIVE BATTLES* THE SECOND PATRON’S ADDRESS ACADEMY OF LAW SYDNEY, 4 OCTOBER 2013 When Sir Edward Coke was appointed Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas in 1606, he was the first for a century who had never appeared as an advocate in that Court. Such appearances were restricted to the handful of senior counsel called serjeants-at-law–––the QC's of the day. Coke had only been coifed as a serjeant the day before his elevation. The coif was a white silk cap worn in court, which Coke once called the helmet of Minerva, traditionally the goddess of wisdom, whom he called, revealingly the goddess of counsel. Coke brought to his new task the full force of his considerable intellect. His encyclopaedic knowledge and his output were prodigious. The Latin inscription on his tombstone correctly describes him as having been a “living library”. However, his mind was so narrow and unsubtle, so incapable of jettisoning detail, so often inconsistent, that no one has ever speculated that he wrote the works of Shakespeare. Macaulay described him as a: “… pedant, bigot and brute [but] … an exception to the maxim … that those who trample on the helpless are disposed to cringe to the powerful”.1 The Institutional Imperative Coke’s aggressive pursuit of the institutional interests of his new Court became as fervid as his advocacy of the interests of the King had been prior to his appointment. His transmogrification was as passionate and as complete as that of Thomas Becket’s transition from Henry II’s Chancellor to the office of Archbishop of Canterbury, a matter with which I have already dealt.2 As a regrettably anonymous pundit once put it: “Where you stand depends on where you sit”.
    [Show full text]
  • Habeas Corpus Proceedings in the High Court of Parliament in the Reign of James I, 1603-1625 Donald E
    Digital Commons @ Georgia Law Scholarly Works Faculty Scholarship 4-1-2014 Habeas Corpus Proceedings in the High Court of Parliament in the Reign of James I, 1603-1625 Donald E. Wilkes Jr. University of Georgia School of Law, [email protected] Repository Citation Donald E. Wilkes Jr., Habeas Corpus Proceedings in the High Court of Parliament in the Reign of James I, 1603-1625 , 54 Am. J. Legal Hist. 200 (2014), Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/fac_artchop/971 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Digital Commons @ Georgia Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scholarly Works by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Georgia Law. Please share how you have benefited from this access For more information, please contact [email protected]. Habeas Corpus Proceedings in the High Court of Parliament in the Reign of James I, 1603-1625 by DONALD E. WILKES, JR.* In 1957, in the Temple Law Quarterly, Erwin Surrency wrote a book review of Catherine Drinker Bowen's biography of Sir Edward Coke, who in the fourth part of his Institutes had praised "the High and most Honourable Court of Parliament." Erwin had a great interest in early English history and was fas- cinated by its legal institutions. And no institution deserves more study than the High Court of Parliament, which, among its other attributes, served as a habeas court. * Professor of Law, University of Georgia School of Law. In this Article, the translations from Latin to English that are enclosed in brackets were made by the present author.
    [Show full text]
  • The Selected Writings of Sir Edward Coke Edward Coke the Selected Writings and Speeches of Sir Edward Coke 
    the selected writings of sir edward coke edward coke the selected writings and speeches of Sir Edward Coke Volume One edited by steve sheppard liberty fund indianapolis, indiana This book is published by Liberty Fund, Inc., a foundation established to encourage study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals. The cuneiform inscription that serves as our logo and as the design motif for our endpapers is the earliest-known written appearance of the word “freedom” (amagi), or “liberty.” It is taken from a clay document written about 2300 b.c. in the Sumerian city-state of Lagash. ᭧ 2003 Liberty Fund, Inc. Frontispiece and cover art: volume I: Reproduced courtesy of the Right Honourable the Earl of Leicester and the Holkham Estate. volume II: Collection of the Editor. volume III: Corbis-Bettmann. 08 07 06 05 04 03 p 54321 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Coke, Edward, Sir, 1552–1634. [Selections. 2003] The selected writings and speeches of Sir Edward Coke edited by Steve Sheppard. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn 0-86597-313-x (pbk.: alk. paper) 1. Law—England. I. Sheppard, Steve, 1963– II. Title. kd358.c65 2003 349.42Ј092—dc22 2003061935 ISBNs: 0-86597-313-x volume I 0-86597-314-8 volume II 0-86597-441-1 volume III 0-86597-316-4 set Liberty Fund, Inc. 8335 Allison Pointe Trail, Suite 300 Indianapolis, Indiana 46250-1684 Summary of Contents Annotated Table of Contents vii Acknowledgments and Dedicatory xvii A Note on the Texts, Editions, and Translations xix Introduction xxiii Chronology of Events Material to the Life, Times, Writings, and Legacy of Sir Edward Coke from the Death of Henry VIII to the Opinion in Marbury v.
    [Show full text]